When it comes to LGBTQ+ and the Mennonite Brethren church, what do we know for sure?

 

Rich Janzen is a member of a Mennonite Brethren church in Ontario and was a delegate to the March 2023 Ontario Mennonite Brethren Church convention where Southridge Community Church and the Toronto Free Church were expelled from membership.

 

Prior to attending the convention, he was informed by the leadership of his church that all delegates from the congregation were expected to vote to expel the two churches. Rich responded that he would vote his conscience.

 

Rich provided this reflection on the convention, along with his remarks to the delegate body about expelling Southridge and Free Church.

                                            +++++++++++++++

 

When I was young, I had a construction boss who used to greet people with a strange question: “What do you know for sure?”

 

My personality is such that, at first, I thought I needed to answer him literally.

 

After a few mornings of awkward greetings, I came to realize that he was just being playful; inviting me to greet back in an equally flippant way (e.g., “certainly not the weather;” “not really sure;” “who are you again?”) Even so, his odd question has stuck with me. 

 

It came to me again earlier this year after Southridge Community Church was suspended by the Ontario Mennonite Brethren Conference (ONMB).  

 

During the time leading up to the March 2023 assembly, where the vote would be taken to expel Southridge from the Conference, I began thinking about what I would say on the convention floor about the motion to remove that church from Conference membership. How would I organize my thoughts for the brief 3-4 minutes of allotted time? 

 

That’s when I decided to use that question from my old boss to help me frame my response: “What do we know for sure?”

 

I’m not a theologian. I’m not a pastor. I’m not even a lay church leader at the moment. But I know a few things for sure, as found in Palmer Becker’s Anabaptist essentials. Becker boils Anabaptism down to three essential statements:

 

·       Jesus is the centre of our faith

·       Community is the centre of our life 

·       Reconciliation is the centre of our work

 

Becker’s essentials are really just an updated repackaging of Harold S. Bender’s more famous Anabaptist Vision, where he highlights the distinctives of our radical Anabaptist forbearers relative to other reformers.

 

You can see the echo of these essentials in the new organizational tagline of the Mennonite World Conference: “Following Jesus, living out unity, building peace.” (In a recent article in Direction journal, Lynn Jost has offered how this three-part focus could be tweaked to our uniquely Mennonite Brethren context.) 

 

All to say that I felt these three essentials were as good a starting place as any in helping me to frame a response to the unprecedented motion before our provincial conference. Below find what I shared with the convention delegates. I suppose others may have assessed the motion through this lens somewhat differently. But my point in speaking was not only to share my conclusion on the motion, but also that we should frame our assessment of it through the grid of some set of agreed upon first principles. (Not on cherry-picked statements of faith, much less on emotion such as fear.)

 

We now know that mine was a minority opinion among delegates. The vote wasn’t even close. Southridge (along with Free Church) was dismembered. 

 

Over half a year later, I’m left wondering who we are as a denomination. I wonder if there is any consensus on what Mennonite Brethren would say are our essentials. And I wonder who gets to do this framing of our essentials, especially in light of the word “Brethren” in our name, with its non hierarchical and communal overtones.

 

And I also wonder what it means that we have come to dismember our own. (I use the term “dismember” because it conveys literally that some are no longer formal members, but also because it conveys figuratively the pain and loss involved, both to those dismembered and presumably for those who remain).

 

In the last two years there have been a number of Mennonite Brethren congregations across Canada that have been dismembered either actively (by formal vote) or passively (left voluntarily after struggle). Similarly, there have been individuals who have been dismembered from their local congregations—my own congregation has experienced a rash of dismemberings, including long-term members and former leaders.

 

I suspect that this recent inclination of Canadian Mennonite Brethren to dismember will continue. And it makes me wonder what we know for sure, and who we have become.

 

Comments made on the Ontario MB Conference convention floor (February 25, 2023)

 

Hello, I’m Rich Janzen. I’m struggling to see how this motion [to remove Southridge Community Church from Ontario Mennonite Brethren membership] is consistent with our Anabaptist identity. I’ll give three quick reasons for this that are linked to the three Anabaptist essentials that Palmer Becker talks about.

 

First, Jesus is the centre of our faith. We Anabaptists privilege the gospels and read the rest of scripture through that lens of the life and teachings of Jesus.

 

I haven’t heard the rationale of this motion being [explicitly] based on the Gospels, about how Southridge is no longer following the direct example and direct teachings of Jesus. One could argue that Southridge has been following the example of Jesus in his radical hospitality and inclusion.

 

Second, community is the centre of our life, Christian community that is marked by unity in fellowship. This unity was Jesus’s only prayer for us in John 17. Paul picks up on this unity theme in Romans 14 not in some abstract universal big “C” church way, but in tangible local fellowship. He teaches us how we can live together despite strong disagreements. His advice isn’t to check out of community or to push others out of community.

 

In contrast, the motion before us is to dismember Southridge from our community. To me, that seems to reflect the way of the world, which likes to create echo chambers and votes off the island those who are disagreeable or those whose views make one feel uncomfortable. I fail to see how this motion is a fulfillment of Jesus’ prayer for us to live united in community.

 

And third, reconciliation is the centre of our ministry. This point is made in Article 13 of our Mennonite Brethren confession of faith that says that we’re people of peace and reconciliation.

 

The truth is reconciliation between the church and our LGBTQ+ siblings is desperately needed. There has been harm done by the church to the LGBTQ community (something not acknowledged in the Provincial Faith and Life Team report). Southridge has acknowledged that truth and has begun the hard work of reconciliation.

 

That sounds Anabaptist to me. I would humbly suggest that congregations who have closeted the truth of harm or resisted conversations and other efforts of reconciliation are not in line with Article 13 of our Confession of Faith. We should be careful of casting stones.

 

So, three reasons for your consideration. Combined, they raise the question of why this topic is leading us to live outside of our character. I personally think we would do well to wrestle with this question and I think there is wisdom in the calls from across the country for a moratorium on congregational suspensions and pastoral credential reviews until we sort this out.

 

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

"Love Beyond Belief" is the guiding principle for Southridge Community Church

It’s been six months since Southridge Community Church in St. Catharines, Ont. was expelled from the Ontario Conference of Mennonite Brethren Churches over its stance on welcoming and affirming LGBTQ+ people and same-sex marriage. 

Since I had done a follow up with Estuary Church, formerly Cedar Park, about how they were doing after leaving the British Columbia Mennonite Brethren Conference, I thought I would check in with Southridge pastor Jeff Lockyer to see about an update. 

“Nothing much to report on our end,” he replied. “We enjoyed a terrific ‘Love Beyond Belief’ celebration service the Sunday after our denominational expulsion, being able to fully and equally include followers of Jesus who hold both convictions on the biblical definition of marriage.” 

Since then, he said, “things have been rather quiet on that front, allowing us to stay focused on embodying Jesus and incarnating His love to a greater degree.” 

“Love Beyond Belief?” I was intrigued. What was that all about? How did they arrive at it? And how has the congregation responded? So I asked Jeff. In reply, he pointed me to a message he gave in February 2023 on this topic. A summary of that message is below. 

In the message, Lockyer began by telling the story of Tony and Michelle, a couple who used to attend another church before coming to Southridge. 

At their previous church, the two were required to sign a statement of beliefs in order to be part of the congregation. 

One of those beliefs was a statement opposed to same-sex marriage. Tony and Michelle couldn’t sign it—their son is gay. 

When they came to Southridge to inquire about being part of that church, Lockyer told them there were members who also believed in a traditional definition of marriage along with those who had an affirming view. 

But that was OK, he said, because the church had worked to create space for both points of view through its approach of “love beyond belief.” 

The two circles were distinct, but through that approach overlapped to stay together.  

That, Lockyer said, “represents the journey our community is on . . . people who hold both views are one family.” Tony and Michelle were invited to be part of it—an invitation they accepted. 

Southridge’s journey goes back early to mid 2000s, Lockyer went on to say. 

We had a problem to solve . . . the negative impact the Christian faith and their own church had, and was having, on LGBTQ+ people

“We had a problem to solve,” he said. That problem was the negative impact the Christian faith and their own church had, and was having, on LGBTQ+ people. 

That impact, he said, was different from the impact “Jesus had on people when he walked the earth.” 

The church committed itself to solve that problem by bridging what it called “the impact gap” between who Christ was and how the Christian faith was experienced by LGBTQ+ people. 

But soon the church realized it had another problem: The  radioactive division that came with trying to talk about these issues among Christians

That seemed all fine and good. But soon the church realized it had another problem on its hands: “The intensity of polarization and the radioactive division that came with trying to talk about these issues among Christians,” as Lockyer put it. 

Christians, he said, were “harshly divided” about this matter, a division that seemed insurmountable. 

“We wondered how God would be able to neutralize these divisions to create a safety of space that we could see the impact on LGBTQ+ people changed,” he said. 

That’s when God directed them to passages in scripture they had not paid much attention to, he said. 

It’s in the book of Romans, in chapter 14, where Paul addresses an issue dividing the church in Rome: Whether it was acceptable to eat meat offered to idols and whether it was OK not to observe the sabbath. 

Those two issues were tearing the church apart. 

Eating meat offered to idols and keeping the sabbath were tearing the church apart. Paul called these disputable matters

Paul’s response was to call them “disputable matters,” not foundational to whether or not someone was following Christ, Lockyer said. 

Paul, he said, was trying to bring together these two independent circles so they could “co-exist as people of diverse convictions in the same community.” 

Paul did not say that people on both sides have to give up their convictions,  Lockyer noted. In fact, he urged them to continue to hold them.  

But he also said one other thing: While it was OK for them to hold their positions for and against eating meat offered to idols and observing or not observing the sabbath, they should not judge those who don’t hold the same convictions. 

“Your job is not to force them on other people, and not judge other people who hold different convictions than yours,” Lockyer said, interpreting Paul. 

“Be a bridge builder, pursue oneness . . . Let us make every effort to do what leads to peace and mutual edification. Don’t destroy the work of God for the sake of food.” 

Those passages in Romans opened up a new way for Southridge to view same-sex marriage

Those passages opened up a new way for Southridge to view the topic of same-sex marriage, Lockyer said. “We see it as a disputable matter,” he said, adding the goal is to “build a bridge of love and oneness” between the perspectives. 

Ah, but that’s the challenge. What for some might be seen as disputable is, for others, a matter of absolute bedrock Christian faith. Not disputable at all, in other words. 

For Lockyer, the answer to that is in the foundation of Christian faith going back to the Reformation. “Our belief is in grace and faith alone, in Christ alone,” he said. “Anything added to that dilutes the purity and simplicity of the message and person of Christ.” 

Southridge also found support in Matthew 22, where the religious rulers of Jesus’ day tried to trip him up by asking what would happen to a woman who married seven times—whose husband would she be in the afterlife? 

Jesus, he said, refused to be backed into a corner. In eternity, Jesus said, people will not be married or given in marriage. 

If marriage wasn't a big deal to Jesus in his reply to the religious rulers, why are Christians today making it a bigger deal?

Or, as Lockyer put it, if it wasn’t a big deal to Jesus, “we wondered if we were making a bigger deal” of marriage than Jesus intended. “It was not essential or eternal.” 

That, he concluded, is the “journey God had us on . . . this is the way we feel we want to be as a community. This is the disputable matters framework. We want to live in peace, not judge each other. It is love beyond belief.” 

That doesn’t mean it’s been easy, he said. But it is doable. “People are not asked to change their views, but they are asked to develop a spirit to live in unity and harmony with people of different views.” 

That goes for people on both sides, both traditional and affirming views of marriage, he said, adding “we feel we have neutralized that polarization in our church by inviting people from both views to a safe environment.” 

For Lockyer, God has led Southridge to a place where they are “one community united around ‘love beyond belief.’” 

Read more posts on this blog about Southridge here.

A report from the ONMB convention where Southridge Community Church and FreeChurch were removed from Conference membership

 

Someone who attended the Feb. 24-25 Ontario Conference of Mennonite Brethren Churches (ONMB) convention—the one where Southridge Community Church and FreeChurch Toronto were removed from membership in the Conference—shared the following report with this blog. This person wishes to remain anonymous.

I want to start first by acknowledging that ONMB leadership provided ample space to discuss the suspensions and proposed expulsions, with a Zoom meeting four days prior to the convention and then an in-person breakout session on the day of the decision.

During the in-person breakout session, there was first a panel interview recapping the questions and answers from the Zoom meeting, followed by open mic questions and answers.

Those questions and comments from the in-person breakout included (paraphrased):

Q. What can we do about the storyline of condemnation and how do we enter the journey of reconciliation?  Would it not be wise to pause these processes? A. The clarity of our position is so important for our posture on this issue.

Q. "Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace" (Eph. 4:3).  Does this not apply to churches in a denomination? A. No, it does not. The invitation to unity needs to stand alongside ethics.

Q. Re: Southridge. Are we expelling congregations based on their intentions? Is that the precedence we want to set? Why not more time? A. It has not been a hasty process. Yes, congregations can be expelled for expressed intentions.

When it came to the motion to expel FreeChurch, it passed without much discussion and no dissenting voices. No representatives from FreeChurch were present at the convention or the Zoom meeting four days prior.

When the motion to expel Southridge Community Church came up, it was followed by many comments and questions.

Many voiced their support of the motion, with comments such as (paraphrased):

"Yes, Jesus showed grace, but he also took sin very seriously."

"Our congregation is new to this conference, but we are rejoicing to be part of a family that stands up for truth."

"We have had two study conferences on this subject and the matter is settled. Why are we still debating this?"

Many voiced dissent about the motion, with comments such as (paraphrased):

"How is this motion consistent with our Anabaptist identity which emphasizes Jesus's teaching of community marked by unity and fellowship? Reconciliation is the centre of our ministry."

"This motion to expel seems hasty. Should we be shutting down conversations this way?"

A delegate raised a question about the motion: 

"I understand that this motion is here because some larger congregations within ONMB indicated that they would withdraw from the conference if Southridge were not suspended/expelled. If this vote is a 'no,' will those congregations rescind their ultimatums or follow through on them?"

The ONMB chair said that only those congregations could answer that question and welcomed them to speak to it. None did.

A delegate proposed an amendment to the motion, pointing out that Southridge Community Church represents three unique congregations in three distinct locations, one being the historic site of Niagara's first MB congregation (Vineland), and each with their own location pastor. 

The amendment was proposed to reflect this, specifically naming all three congregations being expelled. The motion was defeated, albeit narrowly.

Another delegate pointed out that in discussing a motion to expel Southridge, no representative from Southridge was given the opportunity to speak and asked that they be given such an opportunity. 

The ONMB Board agreed, and Jeff Lockyer (Southridge Lead Pastor) read a prepared statement which defended Southridge's intentions to fully include LGBTQ+ persons, disagreed with the motion to expel, yet expressed gratitude to ONMB leadership.

The motion passed with the required 2/3 majority, although no specific count of “for” or “against” was shared.

After concluding the business session, the ONMB Board invited Southridge pastors Jeff Lockyer and Jeff Martens forward for a previously agreed upon prayer of "blessing and release," blessing them for the shared work of God's Kingdom.

ONMB leadership has been asked if they would like to make a statement about the vote and the process leading up to it.

Southridge Community Church pastor Jeff Lockyer responds after his church is removed from the Ontario Conference of Mennonite Brethren Churches

 

 

Southridge Community Church lead pastor Jeff Lockyer reflects on his church’s journey to becoming welcoming and affirming of LGBTQ+ as a “Love Beyond Belief” community, and its resulting removal from the Ontario Mennonite Brethren Conference (ONMB). Southridge is located in St. Catharines, Ont. 

“I don’t give a sh** what you believe. We’ve got to stop the suicides.” 

That’s what an LGBTQ+ community leader from St. Catharines, Ont. told Jeff Lockyer, pastor of Southridge Community Church, back in 2005, citing research that showed LGBTQ+ youth who grew up in religious homes where homosexuality was viewed unfavourably were more likely to try to kill themselves. 

The two had met for a discussion about Christianity and homosexuality. Lockyer, who had been one of the pastors of the Mennonite Brethren church since 1997, wanted to learn more about how his congregation could serve Queer people—and explain what Christian churches had believed for centuries on the topic of homosexuality. 

That comment had a profound impact on Lockyer. 

“I realized that day our church needed to do whatever it could to make our community better and safer for members of the LGBTQ+ community,” he said. 

Fast forward to November 2022 when Southridge, which has been part of the Ontario Conference of Mennonite Brethren Churches (ONMB) since its inception in 1980 (as a plant from three Niagara Region MB churches), was suspended by the Conference for “publicly communicating its intention to invite members of the LGBTQ+ community into all levels of participation, leadership and decision-making within the church.” 

The journey from that conversation in 2005 to suspension in 2022 includes how the church decided to focus on the realities of marginalization—causes like homelessness, food insecurity and migrant farmworkers.    

That growing sensitivity to marginalization also drove them to become better relatives with the Indigenous community, and also to become more effective at empowering women in leadership. 

At the same time, it caused them to think about how Southridge could be a safer place for members of the LGBTQ+ community. 

Through that initial conversation, Lockyer became aware of the pain the church caused for many Queer people. 

“I had been awakened to their marginalization and vulnerability, and how they had been harmed and completely ignored by many churches,” he said. 

Finding a way for Southridge to come alongside them was “a natural part of our process of caring for people on the margins.” 

The church quietly explored the topic until 2016. That’s when Lockyer raised the topic of LGBTQ+ inclusion in the church with conference leaders. 

There were objections. “They revolved around the biblical definition of marriage, and how people read the Bible, as interpreted and expressed through the Confession of Faith,” he said.

The church continued discussing the topic among its leadership and membership, ultimately discerning, in the summer of 2019, that interpretations on the biblical view of marriage were not essential components to experiencing salvation or growing in relationship with Jesus. 

“We saw it as a disputable matter, one where people in our Mennonite Brethren church family could disagree but still be in fellowship,” he said. 

The Conference pushed back. 

“We were told we couldn’t do that,” he said. “They said the biblical definition of marriage was not allowed to be treated as disputable, since it was a Confessional issue as Mennonite Brethren.” 

Rather than create more conflict, Southridge sought to stay in the space that was allowed it by ONMB leaders at the time. “We wanted to remain in good standing in the Conference, and also out of respect for Ed Willms, the Ontario Conference Executive Director,” he said. 

“Ed made us feel welcome to talk about it, he was open and curious,” said Lockyer, adding the senior leaders of Southridge agreed not to preach against the Confession, not to teach an affirming view and not conduct a same-sex marriage. 

“We value our relationships in the Conference,” Lockyer said. “If making those concessions kept us at the table, we were willing to do that.” 

In early 2020, just before the pandemic hit, this decision was also communicated with members of the LGBTQ+ community. “They understood our dilemma and were good with it,” he said. 

The church hoped to keep the discussion going with the Conference. But the pandemic brought many things to a halt, including any conversations between Southridge and Conference leaders. 

In the meantime, the congregation continued to experience increased urgency to effectively serve members of the LGBTQ+ community. 

Then, in the summer of 2022, the church asked Willms if there would be any space in the Conference for churches to treat the Confessional article on marriage more disputably.   

On September 13, Lockyer was invited by Willms to share Southridge’s story as part of  a Conference listening day, an invitation-only meeting of Ontario Mennonite Brethren pastors and leaders. 

“I thought it was a healthy, honest and diverse discussion,” Lockyer said. “I was proud of the Conference. I don’t know if a similar official conversation like that had ever happened among Mennonite Brethren before.” 

Two days later, the ONMB Board met, and heard from a number of member churches that no additional space for these types of conversations was to be made. 

“After the listening day, it felt like there were only two choices, compliance or ex-communication,” Lockyer said. 

A few weeks later, Willms was terminated as ONMB Executive Director. Shortly afterwards Southridge received notice it was suspended, effective November 5, along with FreeChurch Toronto, which also welcomes and affirms LGBTQ+ people. 

Unless Southridge and FreeChurch changed their minds, the suspensions would lead to removal of membership in the Conference at the 2023 convention. 

Lockyer was disappointed by that decision. On the listening day, he had suggested ways for Southridge to stay in a relationship with the Conference while still disagreeing on this topic—such as staying a member but not being able to vote or have leaders of the church serve on Conference committees. 

“We told them we could be like an adherent in a congregation, someone who belongs but doesn’t have the privileges of membership,” Lockyer said. 

Members of Southridge would still go to conventions, share in the mission, support conference projects, and benefit from being in relationship with others. “We were hoping our family of churches could function the way each of our local church families does,” he said. 

Leaders at the church who were credentialed were also willing to give up their credentials, he said, if it meant paving the way for safer space for LGBTQ+ people. 

“We would do that to stay in relationship with the Conference,” said Lockyer. “The relationship meant that much. But the answer was still no.” 

On February 25, at the annual Conference convention, Southridge was removed from membership along with FreeChurch. 

For Lockyer, the decision is saddening. 

“We didn’t want to leave the Conference. We wanted to stay. I’ve been a pastor in it for 25 years.” 

For him, the removal reflects a different way of doing church by the Conference. 

“When I was credentialed 25 years ago, the most important thing for the Conference was working together in a shared mission, based on long-standing shared relationship. Today it is primarily, if not exclusively about shared belief—that’s the most important thing. The Confession is now viewed as the ‘permission to play’ for all the rest of the family dynamics. Anything that deviates from that belief is a deal breaker,” he said. 

For him, that’s a flawed way to do church. 

“Nobody ever agrees on everything,” he said, comparing the Conference to a family. “In a family we disagree, but we still accept and love each other. We don’t want to see anyone leave or be left out.” 

While sorry about the removal of the church’s membership, Lockyer is still hopeful the Conference will come around on this topic. 

“Fifty years ago, there was no space to discuss women in leadership, but we have resolved that,” he said. “Twenty years ago, it was about divorce and the remarriage of divorced people, and we got through that, too. Our theology evolved.” 

At the same time, Lockyer is sympathetic to Conference leaders. 

“They were in a bind with some churches threatening to leave if they created space for this conversation,” he said. 

As for Southridge, “we just want to incarnate Jesus in our community. We want to be for the people Jesus was most for,” he said. “That’s the single direction we are moving in.” 

Following the vote, Southridge is now a non-denominational church—but one with close ties to the Mennonite Brethren Conference. “We will relate to the Conference as much as we are able,” he said, adding the ties run deep. 

“You can take the church out of the Conference, but you can’t take the Conference out of the church,” he said. 

As for Lockyer, “In my heart I am Anabaptist. I see it as a wide-tent way of doing church, of welcoming all to the table. The more people at the table, the better we all are.”

ONMB did not release the vote total for removing Southridge and FreeChurch Toronto from membership, but a two-thirds majority is required for it to pass.

Statement by Southridge Community Church to the Ontario Conference of Mennonite Brethren Churches prior to the February 25 vote to remove them from the Conference

 

Prior to the February 25 vote to remove Southridge Community Church from membership in the Ontario Conference of Mennonite Brethren Churches (ONMB), the following statement from the church was read to the delegate body. 

To our ONMB Family, 

First off, we want to acknowledge that our annual convention is intended to be a time to unify and galvanize around our common cause in Christ together, and we know that adding conversations of revoking church memberships, in some ways, takes our attention off that focus. 

As a local church, we want to help contribute to our collective movement towards Christ, not sideways or backwards in determining what a denomination even is these days. Know that we know that, and we are sorry for the additional challenge that these conversations, in some ways, have created. 

As we understand it, one of the goals of ONMB leadership is to establish clarity on these subjects. Please know that we, as a church, are clear. We’re clear that the MB Confession of Faith is something member churches are expected to align to. 

We’re clear that Confessional matters are not to be treated as disputable ones. And we’re clear that doing that has consequences and can even threaten the very status of your membership as an MB church. 

As a local church, we’re clear—and share in the same clarity that our ONMB leadership is desiring to provide in this season. We don’t disagree with the clarity they seek. 

Our divergence in perspective comes from two places. 

First, while we all seek Confessional alignment, we’ve never understood the MB Confession of Faith to be an air-tight set of absolutes or the single centre of what binds us together. 

When it comes to friends, family members and church or mission partners in Ukraine these days, for example, I wonder how many of us are praying for and actively supporting them compared to how many of us are insisting that they stand down in spite of Russian onslaught—because that’s what Article 13 on love and nonresistance upholds. 

And the fact that there are different views on how to respond to war among our MB family, churches, and leaders isn’t something resulting in church memberships being revoked. There’s always been some unity-amidst-diversity among our MB family even when it comes to the interpretation and application of the Confession in our local contexts. 

Second, we believe that our ONMB family is just that—a family. We believe that we’re bound together by three dimensions: shared relationship, shared mission, and shared beliefs. We believe that to be part of our family is to share in all those dimensions—but appreciating that we share them in varying degrees. 

So we feel that divergence on one or a couple articles of shared belief shouldn’t result in full removal from the family, because we feel like our family identity is about more than this one or couple articles. 

Southridge Community Church is an MB church, full of MB people, because of the whole complement of what we share together: our relationships, our mission, and our Confessional beliefs. 

So, especially when you consider the unity-amidst-diversity that already exists regarding our Confession, we don’t feel that divergence on one or a couple Confessional articles needs to sever our identity as a family.

At this point—Convention 2023—the motion put forward by our ONMB leadership obviously illustrates that we see this differently. And while our church views Confessional alignment and Conference identity differently, we do respect our Conference leadership and will respect the decision of our collective delegate membership. 

And if it’s determined that, as a result of our delegate vote, Southridge is no longer a member MB church, our MB people will continue to participate in our extended family as we’re allowed, leveraging our shared relationship for shared mission to do together what we otherwise couldn’t do alone. 

Our hope is, as we continue to engage with our MB family as a non-member church (if that’s where this vote lands), that you will respect our position as well, where—in the context of our local church’s membership and community hermeneutic—our people are ten-to-one in favour of moving forward to create equal, free and full expression of both the affirming and traditional views on marriage. 

If, as a result of your decision, Southridge ceases to be a member MB church, we hope you’ll continue to welcome, include, and partner with us for the sake of our shared mission as we’ve done together for decades. 

This, in fact, is why we haven’t voluntarily withdrawn our Conference membership, and are submitting the decision to a Convention delegate vote—because our people want to continue to be part of the only denominational family we’ve ever known. Our church wants to continue to be an MB member church. 

We love all of you very much. We love our shared history. We love our shared identity. We loved our shared relationships, our shared mission, and our shared beliefs. Regardless of the outcome of this Convention delegate vote, those things will continue. We love you. We respect your decision. And we’re sorry for the difficulty this has added to our mutual work of ushering in the realities of the Kingdom of God on earth and across our province as it is in heaven. 

As a local church, we’re trying to do just that when it comes to the inclusion of LGBTQ+ people and those who hold affirming views on the biblical definition of marriage. We’d love nothing more than to continue doing that together with all of you. And we’ll continue to as much as we can together—being spiritual family and realizing the answer to Jesus’ one prayer for unity among all his disciples in spite of differences.